deep root feeding
- Thread starter Webster
- Start date
TreeLogic
Branched out member
- Location
- Coastal SC
Roots have to have pore space or little air pockets to grow and be happy. The majority of the time the mere weight of the upper layers of soil will prevent that from happening too deep down. So, in average conditions, no they don't grow too deep, but they can in the right conditions.
TreeLogic
Branched out member
- Location
- Coastal SC
There are a lot of variables. Like where the hardpan layer is. But yes, 12" isn't uncommon.
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Roots will go where roots can grow. Where that is; We Don't Know!
We don't see root systems unless they fail. Our sample is too skewed to allow reliable conclusions.
What's certain is; the more O2 and OM there is deep down, the deeper roots will grow. So 'deep root feeding' in many soils is a good service, more so if it also inoculates with air and OM.
We don't see root systems unless they fail. Our sample is too skewed to allow reliable conclusions.
What's certain is; the more O2 and OM there is deep down, the deeper roots will grow. So 'deep root feeding' in many soils is a good service, more so if it also inoculates with air and OM.
GlennButler
New member
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain
I don't think anyone has ever observed a tree root, deep or shallow, eating anything.
TreeLogic
Branched out member
- Location
- Coastal SC
That's pretty neat and good to know but is it the norm? Alluvial soils aren't found in too many urban environments. Were these roots on the edge of a bank where they could get some air, or were they buried down in an environment that normally would be choked of oxygen? Was it a mass containing hairy roots or just one or two transporters?
I've seen transport roots break through some really tough conditions but there's usually an end to that root with a hairy root system. Not trying to be argumentative but just trying to understand what's important for all intents and purposes.
Guy and I had a debate recently in another thread on this. Guy made the point that if we condition the soil deeply on newly planted trees then the roots will grow deep. But how natural is that? How reasonable will that be to maintain?
I still come from the shallow and horizontal root camp. That is what I have seen in nature in the majority of root systems, on the majority of the species, in natural forest settings. All of my arborist certification training material educated me in that manner, so I'm asking here and now, is modern arboriculture moving away from that teaching? Are these deep growing roots really important for urban tree care, aside from the fact that it does happen sometimes in special situations?
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Unless you're a mole or a badger you have not seen root systems. We can only scratch the surface. 
if we condition the soil deeply on new or old trees then the roots will grow deep. Nothing more natural than that--just bust up the hardpan a little, and the roots can do the rest.
Eat, consume, absorb, take in; synonymous.
if we condition the soil deeply on new or old trees then the roots will grow deep. Nothing more natural than that--just bust up the hardpan a little, and the roots can do the rest.
Eat, consume, absorb, take in; synonymous.
GlennButler
New member
- Location
- Mid-Atlantic Coastal Plain
Guy, I prefer more precision in my language when discussing arboriculture amongst arborists. I don't consider eating synonymous with absorbing. Unlike trees, I'm not an autotroph, so I eat my food.
I think it's an important distinction that should be made and adhered to on an arborist site. If others choose not to make the distinction, that's fine, but I think clarity is lost.
When fertilizer companies can convince consumers that their plants need to be fed, consumers can easily conclude that their plants will starve without an annual supply of purchased plant food. Unfortunately, in my region, much of this pretend plant food only ends up polluting the Chesapeake Bay.
I think it's an important distinction that should be made and adhered to on an arborist site. If others choose not to make the distinction, that's fine, but I think clarity is lost.
When fertilizer companies can convince consumers that their plants need to be fed, consumers can easily conclude that their plants will starve without an annual supply of purchased plant food. Unfortunately, in my region, much of this pretend plant food only ends up polluting the Chesapeake Bay.
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Are deep growing roots important for urban trees?
Is the bear Catholic? Does the Pope...
Glenn, you're right; I market it as root invigoration (asince way before the term was trademarked.)
Is the bear Catholic? Does the Pope...
Glenn, you're right; I market it as root invigoration (asince way before the term was trademarked.)
- Location
- Sioux Falls, SD
I think we all agree that its the conditions in which limits/promotes root growth. I agree with Guy, roots will grow were they can grow. Its been well documented that the root systems of native prairie grasses have roots that go down 8-12 feet. But thats out here in prairie soils where there is a few feet of topsoil and other good soil benefits beneath that.
I guess my argument, however, is why do we care about the deep roots in regards to caring for the trees? Whether its water, nutrients, or air space, its the small fibrous roots just beneath the soil surface that should be the focus. Are you afraid that the grass will steal the fert. or what? Plus, if there are roots down deep, wont the fert. leach down to them eventually or do they even absorb the fert. down there?
I guess my argument, however, is why do we care about the deep roots in regards to caring for the trees? Whether its water, nutrients, or air space, its the small fibrous roots just beneath the soil surface that should be the focus. Are you afraid that the grass will steal the fert. or what? Plus, if there are roots down deep, wont the fert. leach down to them eventually or do they even absorb the fert. down there?
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Whether its water, nutrients, or air space, it's improving conditions below the soil surface that should be the focus in most soils I work in. "Absorbing roots shallow, anchoring roots deep" is another generally accurate statement that becomes a myth when we repeat it over and over--to the exclusion of more complete information--and overgeneralize it. Shallow roots are critical for support--think guy wires--and deeper roots can and do absorb, more so where mycorrhizae can form.
Sinker roots/bayonet roots will grow where conditions are right, so creating those conditions is a reasonable objective.
Sinker roots/bayonet roots will grow where conditions are right, so creating those conditions is a reasonable objective.
TreeLogic
Branched out member
- Location
- Coastal SC
And the reason why soils settle in a certain manner is because that is what they do. You go breaking up the layers way down deep and yep, roots will grow down there. Yay!
Then they're gonna settle again and rob those roots of oxygen. And we're back where we started. The only dirt that's going to stay as viable, root-surviving soil space is the upper layers.
Then they're gonna settle again and rob those roots of oxygen. And we're back where we started. The only dirt that's going to stay as viable, root-surviving soil space is the upper layers.
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Yes that is rather gloomy but theoretically possible, assuming that big air pockets are formed, AND no expanded aggregate or organic matter is inserted (as suggested 11 posts ago), and no glomulin is formed by bioactivity.
Viable rhizospheres thrive deep in the Landscape Below Ground when we convert the C layer into a deeper B layer.
How deep does your soil probe go? Jim Urban goes down 6'-10' and finds lots of layers; page 54 here http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/fletcher/programs/nursery/metria/metria05/m57.pdf
Last edited:
treevet
Branched out member
- Location
- Cincinnati, Ohio
Sure what you're delivering will diffuse to deeper roots but if you deliver it too deep (not saying Webster would do this ;-( .... then what you are delivering will certainly not diffuse upwards! And yes you need to test the soil to find inadequacies but also it is in your pay grade to determine what the needs of the plant you are trying to assist are...as they vary widely. Also is it a good trade off to supply fertilizer in exchange for the increase of salt in the diet so to speak?
As for all this air gun technology lately in vogue. Seems to me with the kind of pressure delivered, and I have observed this many times, the displaced soil space that now is a void (to add amendments as Guy states) has now caused even more compaction in the contiguous spaces outside the void? Good spots created and worse spots created and it is a crap shoot where those fibrous roots are.
As for all this air gun technology lately in vogue. Seems to me with the kind of pressure delivered, and I have observed this many times, the displaced soil space that now is a void (to add amendments as Guy states) has now caused even more compaction in the contiguous spaces outside the void? Good spots created and worse spots created and it is a crap shoot where those fibrous roots are.
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Anyone who is TRAQualified must be able to determine what the needs of the plant you are trying to assist are. How else can you consider mitigation options, and deliver a credible assessment?
and yes of course high-salt ferts are to be avoided in most cases, and/or buffered by OM. Soil work 101.
"Seems to me with the kind of pressure delivered, and I have observed this many times, the displaced soil space that now is a void has now caused even more compaction in the contiguous spaces outside the void?"
??How does one 'observe many times' this theoretical subterranean compaction in the contiguous spaces outside the void? Do you take a bite of the blue mushroom and shrink down like Alice into that Wonderland?
O and forcing compost and aggregate into the holes would tend to scarify the interfaces.
Using a soil probe can tell you exactly where those fibrous roots are, and where they can be. This is soil work 101, not the Great Unknown. Why go out of your way to speculate and criticize what you have no experience with? Kinda like me going on the Climbing forum and speculating about imaginary faults in ascenders.
and yes of course high-salt ferts are to be avoided in most cases, and/or buffered by OM. Soil work 101.
"Seems to me with the kind of pressure delivered, and I have observed this many times, the displaced soil space that now is a void has now caused even more compaction in the contiguous spaces outside the void?"
??How does one 'observe many times' this theoretical subterranean compaction in the contiguous spaces outside the void? Do you take a bite of the blue mushroom and shrink down like Alice into that Wonderland?
O and forcing compost and aggregate into the holes would tend to scarify the interfaces.
Using a soil probe can tell you exactly where those fibrous roots are, and where they can be. This is soil work 101, not the Great Unknown. Why go out of your way to speculate and criticize what you have no experience with? Kinda like me going on the Climbing forum and speculating about imaginary faults in ascenders.
treevet
Branched out member
- Location
- Cincinnati, Ohio
Re...GM
Detect a note of Jealousy?
you seem the authority on things 101. you need to raise your horizons.
Didn't mean "observed ...subterranean..." silly...meant observed the wand aeration of soil many times.
Wasn't referring to the interface...was referring to the soil beyond it...pay attention...we're not in 101 anymore son.
#1. Do not agree you "can tell exactly where fibrous roots are with a soil probe" at least the greatest quantities are nor can you tell where the voids are...unless you have more time than money or your trees generally range in the dogwood or redbud realm...but yeah
#2. I tend to agree with someone with as little climbing experience as you, speculating in a climbing forum might not be kosher.
Why are there no quote options on this forum?
Detect a note of Jealousy?
you seem the authority on things 101. you need to raise your horizons.
Didn't mean "observed ...subterranean..." silly...meant observed the wand aeration of soil many times.
Wasn't referring to the interface...was referring to the soil beyond it...pay attention...we're not in 101 anymore son.
Using a soil probe can tell you exactly where those fibrous roots are, and where they can be. This is soil work 101, not the Great Unknown. Why go out of your way to speculate and criticize what you have no experience with? Kinda like me going on the Climbing forum and speculating about imaginary faults in ascenders.
#1. Do not agree you "can tell exactly where fibrous roots are with a soil probe" at least the greatest quantities are nor can you tell where the voids are...unless you have more time than money or your trees generally range in the dogwood or redbud realm...but yeah
#2. I tend to agree with someone with as little climbing experience as you, speculating in a climbing forum might not be kosher.
Why are there no quote options on this forum?
- Location
- Sioux Falls, SD
Derail... TRAQualified has nothing to do with whether or not one will know about assessing the needs of a tree. Its a useless course, in my opinion, unless your in the need for more letters behind your name while gaining money for an organization off its volunteers work.
And isn't improving soil conditions still focusing on the roots that help the tree? Nice way of putting it in the words that fit your ego, rather than just agreeing with someone else...
And isn't improving soil conditions still focusing on the roots that help the tree? Nice way of putting it in the words that fit your ego, rather than just agreeing with someone else...
guymayor
Branched out member
- Location
- East US, Earth
Careful Sam, a bolt of lightning might blast you! 
I just brought up TRAQ cuz vet bought the letters, and gives me a hard time for declining that opportunity. Not useless for everybody who takes it; depends on what you bring.
As with the IPM standard, 'assessment' is a very general term, which often translates into the quickest of looks. No mention of diagnosis, but it does outline some of the steps in a systematic inspection that gives credibility to conclusions.
I just brought up TRAQ cuz vet bought the letters, and gives me a hard time for declining that opportunity. Not useless for everybody who takes it; depends on what you bring.
As with the IPM standard, 'assessment' is a very general term, which often translates into the quickest of looks. No mention of diagnosis, but it does outline some of the steps in a systematic inspection that gives credibility to conclusions.
New threads New posts
-
test
-
Free CEUs: February 05 & March 05 - 'Urban Forestry Today' Webcasts @ Noon (Eastern)- Started by UFT
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
